HannawayOwen, “Laboratory design and the aim of science: Andreas Libavius versus Tycho Brahe”, Isis, lxxvii (1986), 585–610; and OphirAdiShapinSteven, “The place of knowledge: A methodological survey”, Science in context, iv (1991), 3–21. GolinskiJan, Making natural knowledge: Constructivism and the history of science (Cambridge, 1998), chap. 3.
2.
ShapinSteven, “The house of experiment”, Isis, lxxix (1988), 373–404; GalisonPeter, “Bubble chambers and the experimental workplace”, in AchinsteinPeterHannawayOwen (eds), Observation, experiment, and hypothesis in modern physical science (Cambridge, Mass., 1985), 309–73; ForganSophie, “The architecture of display: Museums, universities and objects in nineteenth-century Britain”, History of science, xxxii (1994), 139–62; GoodayGraeme, “The premisses of premises: Spatial issues in the historical construction of laboratory credibility”, in SmithCrosbieAgarJon (eds), Making space for science (London, 1998), 216–45; GierynThomas F., “Biotechnology's private parts (and some public ones)”, in GalisonPeterThompsonEmily (eds), Architecture and science (Cambridge, Mass., 1999), 281–312; OutramDorinda, “New spaces in natural history”, in JardineNicholasSecordJames A.SparyE. C. (eds), Cultures of natural history (Cambridge, 1995), 249–65; FindlenPaula, Possessing nature: Museums, collecting, and scientific culture in early modern Italy (Berkeley, 1994), chap. 3; SecordAnne, “Science in the pub: Artisan botanists in early nineteenth-century Lancashire”, History of science, xxxii (1994), 269–315; and JacksonMyles, Spectrum of belief: Joseph von Frauenhofer and the craft of precision optics (Cambridge, Mass., 2000).
3.
LatourBruno, “Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world”, in Knorr-CetinaKarinMulkayMichael (eds), Science observed (London, 1983), 141–70; Latour, The Pasteurization of France (Cambridge, Mass., 1988), chap. 2.
4.
CittadinoEugene. “‘A marvelous cosmopolitan preserve’: The dunes, Chicago, and the dynamic ecology of Henry Cowles”, Perspectives on science, i (1993), 520–59; MaienscheinJane, “Pattern and process in early studies of Arizona's San Francisco Peaks”, Bioscience, xliv (1994), 479–85; BurkhardtRichard W.Jr, “Ethology, natural history, the life sciences, and the problem of place”, Journal of the history of biology, xxxii (1999), 489–508; and HenkeChristopher R., “Making a place for science: The field trial”, Social studies of science, xxx (2000), 483–511.
5.
Golinski, Making natural knowledge (ref. 1), 98.
6.
On city and country see CrononWilliam, Nature's metropolis: Chicago and the Great West (New York, 1991).
7.
Shapin, “House of experiment” (ref. 2), 397. ShapinSteven, A social history of truth: Civility and science in seventeenth-century England (Chicago, 1994).
8.
BoyleRobert also used the literary technique of “virtual witnessing”, as Steven Shapin has called it, but a mimetic style soon gave way to the clipped, placeless, and impersonal style characteristic of modern scientific writing. ShapinSteven, “Pump and circumstance: Robert Boyle's literary technology”, Social studies of science, xiv (1984), 481–520; and HolmesFrederic L., “Argument and narrative in scientific writing”, in DearPeter (ed.), The literary structure of scientific argument (Philadelphia, 1991), 164–81.
9.
I know of no critical analysis of the narrative conventions of hunting or natural-history writing. Useful points of entry into the history of travel narratives include KorteBarbara, English travel writing from pilgrimages to postcolonial explorations (London, 2000); RubiésJoan-Pau, “Instructions for travelers: Teaching the eye to see”, History and anthropology, ix (1996), 139–90; AdamsPercy G., Travel literature and the evolution of the novel (Lexington, Ky, 1983); and LöfgrenOrvar, On holiday: A history of vacationing (Berkeley, 1999), part 1. See also StaffordBarbara M., Voyages into substance: Art, science, nature, and the illustrated travel account, 1760–1840 (Cambridge, Mass., 1984); and SmithBernard, Imagining the Pacific: In the wake of the Cook voyages (New Haven, 1992).
10.
WondersKaren, Habitat dioramas: Illusions of wilderness in museums of natural history (Stockholm, 1993).
11.
PorterRoy S., “Gentlemen and geology: The emergence of a scientific career, 1660–1920”, Historical journal, xxi (1978), 809–36.
12.
RudwickMartin, “Geological travel and theoretical innovation: The role of ‘liminal’ experience”, Social studies of science, xxvi (1996), 143–59.
13.
HevlyBruce, “The heroic science of glacier motion”, Osiris, xi (1996), 66–86; OreskesNaomi, “Objectivity or heroism? On the invisibility of women in science”, Osiris, xi (1996), 87–116. RiffenburghBeau, The myth of the explorer (New York, 1994).
14.
KuklickHenrika, “After Ishmael: The fieldwork tradition and its future”, in GuptaAkhilFergusonJames (eds), Anthropological locations: Boundaries and grounds of a field science (Berkeley, 1997), 47–65; StockingGeorge W.Jr, “The ethnographer's magic: Fieldwork in British anthropology from Tylor to Malinowski”, in Stocking (ed.), Observers observed: Essays on ethnographic fieldwork (Madison, 1983), 70–120.
15.
GrinnellJoseph to RitterWilliam E., 29 Feb. 1908; also 31 Mar. 1908, PapersWilliam E. Ritter, box 10, Bancroft Library, Berkeley, Cal. Frederic E. Clements to Robert S. Woodward, 2 Feb. 1919, Carnegie Institution Archives, folder Ecology Projects Proposed, Washington, D.C. Henry A. Gleason to Arthur G. Vestal, 6 Feb. 1912; Gleason to Vestal, 13 Mar., 1 Aug. 1913, all in Arthur G. Vestal Papers, box 2, University of Illinois Archives, Urbana, Ill.
16.
DastonLorraineGalisonPeter, “The image of objectivity”, Representations, xl (1992), 81–128; Daston, “Objectivity and the escape from perspective”, Social studies of science, xxii (1992), 587–618.
17.
LatourBruno, “Visualization and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands”, Knowledge and society, vi (1986), 1–40; Latour, Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society (Cambridge, Mass., 1987); and ShapinSteven, “How science travels”, unpublished talk to the Society for Social Studies of Science, October 1997.
18.
ShelfordVictor E., “Ecological succession, II: Pond fishes”, Biological bulletin, xxi (1911), 127–51.
19.
KohlerRobert E., Landscapes and labscapes: Exploring the lab-field frontier in biology (Chicago, 2002).
20.
For examples of mistaken identity see NelsonAven, “Popular ignorance concerning botany and botanists”, Plant world, iii (1900), 33–36 (Nelson was professor of botany at the University of Wyoming); AdamsCharles C. to DavenportCharles B., 2 Sept. [1900], PapersCharles B. Davenport, General Series, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, Pa.; and SterlingKeir B., Last of the naturalists: The career of C. Hart Merriam (New York, 1977), 39.
21.
Shapin, “House of experiment” (ref. 2); also Shapin, Social history of truth (ref. 7).
22.
Outram, “New spaces in natural history” (ref. 2).
23.
de ChadarevianSoraya, “Laboratory science versus country-house experiments: The controversy between Julius Sachs and Charles Darwin”, The British journal for the history of science, xxix (1996), 11–A1; ForganSophie, “The architecture of display: Museums, universities and objects in nineteenth-century Britain”, History of science, xxxii (1994), 139–62, pp. 151–6. See also PickstoneJohn V., “Museological science? The place of the analytical / comparative in nineteenth-century science, technology and medicine”, History of science, xxxii (1994), 111–38.
24.
GoodayGraeme, “‘Nature in the laboratory’: Domestication and discipline with the microscope in Victorian life science”, The British journal for the history of science, xxiv (1991), 307–41, p. 313.
25.
NyhartLynn K., “Natural history and the ‘new’ biology”, in Jardine (eds), Cultures of natural history (ref. 2), 426–43.
26.
PantinC. F. A., The relations between the sciences (Cambridge, 1968), 5.
27.
For example, JordanKathleenLynchMichael, “The sociology of a genetic engineering technique: Ritual and rationality in the performance of the ‘plasmid prep’”, in ClarkeAdele E.FujimuraJoan H. (eds), The right tools for the job: At work in twentieth-century life sciences (Princeton, 1992), 77–114; and CollinsHarry M., Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice (London, 1985), chap. 3.
28.
SummerhayesV. S.EltonCharles S., “Contributions to the ecology of Spitsbergen and Bear Island”, Journal of ecology, xi (1923), 214–86; and “Further contributions to the ecology of Spitsbergen”, ibid., xvi (1928), 193–268. Elton, Animal ecology (London, 1927).
29.
CrowcroftPeter, Elton's ecologists: A history of the Bureau of Animal Population (Chicago, 1991).
30.
ErringtonPaul L., “Some contributions of a fifteen-year local study of the northern bobwhite to a knowledge of population phenomena”, Ecological monographs, xv (1945), 1–34; Errington, “The northern bob-white's winter territory”, Iowa State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research bulletin, cci (1936), 331–433; Errington, “Predation and vertebrate populations”, Quarterly review of biology, xxi (1946), 144–77, 221–45.
31.
LindemanRaymond L., “Seasonal food-cycle dynamics in a senescent lake”, American midland naturalist, xxvi (1941), 636–73; Lindeman, “The developmental history of Cedar Creek Bog, Minnesota”, ibid., xxvi (1941), 101–21; Lindeman, “The trophic-dynamic aspect of ecology”, Ecology, xxiii (1942), 399–418; CookRobert E., “Raymond Lindeman and the trophic-dynamic concept in ecology”, Science, cxcviii (1977), 22–26; HagenJoel, An entangled bank: The origins of ecosystem ecology (New Brunswick, 1992), 87–99; and GolleyFrank B., A history of the ecosystem concept in ecology (New Haven, 1993), 48–56.
32.
ShreveForrest, The vegetation of a desert mountain range as conditioned by climatic factors (Carnegie Institution Publication no. 217; Washington, 1915); Shreve, “Soil temperature as influenced by altitude and slope exposure”, Ecology, v (1924), 128–36.
33.
SumnerFrancis B., “Genetic studies of several geographic races of California deer-mice”, American naturalist, xlix (1915), 688–701; HallHarvey M.ClementsFrederic E., The phylogenetic method in taxonomy: The North American species of Artemesia, Chrysothamnus, and Atriplex (Carnegie Institution Publication no. 326; Washington, 1923).
34.
TurresonGoete, “The genotypic response of the plant species to the habitat”, Hereditas, iii (1922), 211–350. Turreson, “The selective effect of climate upon plant species”, ibid., xv (1931), 99–152. ClausenJensKeckDavid D.HieseyWilliam M., Experimental studies on the nature of species, I: Effect of varied environments on western North American plants (Carnegie Institution Publication no. 520; Washington, 1940), 16, 396–401. See in particular HallHarvey M. to ClementsFrederic E., 19 Feb., 12 Apr. 1925, PapersFrederic E. Clements, box 65, American Heritage Center, Laramie, Wyoming. Hall to John C. Merriam, 1 July 1925, Carnegie Institution Archives.
35.
Clausen, Experimental studies (ref. 34), 4–15. HallHarvey M. to MerriamJohn C., 18 June, 1, 18 Sept., 20 Oct. 1926, Carnegie Institution Archives. Hall to Frederic E. Clements, 10 Aug. 1923, Clements Papers, box 63.
36.
HallHarvey M. to ClementsFrederic E., 14 Mar. 1924, Clements Papers, box 64. Clausen, Experimental studies (ref. 34); ClausenJens, Stages in the evolution of plant species (Ithaca, 1951).
37.
OdumHoward T., “Trophic structure and productivity of Silver Springs, Florida”, Ecological monographs, xxvii (1957), 55–112; Odum, “Primary production in eleven Florida springs and a marine turtlegrass community”, Limnology and oceanography, ii (1957), 85–97.
38.
OdumHoward T.OdumEugene, “Trophic structure and productivity of a windward coral reef community on Eniwetok Atoll”, Ecological monographs, xxv (1955), 291–320; BormannFrank HerbertLikensGene E., “Nutrient cycling”, Science, clv (1967), 424–9; LikensGene E.BormannFrank Herbert, Biogeochemistry of a forested ecosystem (New York, 1977), 1–29; OdumEugene P., “Energy flow in ecosystems: A historical review”, American zoologist, viii (1968), 11–18. Golley, History of the ecosystem concept (ref. 31); Hagen, Entangled bank (ref. 31).
39.
RudwickMartin J. S., “Encounters with Adam, or at least the hyaenas: Nineteenth-century representations of the deep past”, in History, humanity and evolution, ed. by MooreJames R. (New York, 1989), 231–52, p. 239.
40.
Sumner, “Genetic studies” (ref. 33), 696–7. See also ClementsFrederic E., “The relict method in dynamic ecology”, Journal of ecology, xxii (1934), 39–68, pp. 41–42, 46; HallClements, Phylogenetic method (ref. 33), 20–22; and AdamsCharles C., “The variations and ecological distribution of the snails of the genus Io”, Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, xii/2 (1915), 1–184, pp. 7–8.
41.
PantinCarl F. A., The relations between the sciences (Cambridge, 1968), 16–17. For a similar argument in cultural ecology see FreilichMorris, “The natural experiment, ecology and culture”, Southwestern journal of anthropology, xix (1963), 21–39.
42.
WeinerJonathan, The beak of the finch: A story of evolution in our time (New York, 1994); GoldschmidtTijs, Darwin's dreampond: Drama in Lake Victoria (Cambridge, Mass., 1996); CooperWilliam S., “The recent ecological history of Glacier Bay, Alaska”, Ecology, iv (1923), 93–128, 223–46, 355–65; and MacDougalDaniel T., The Salton Sea (Carnegie Institution Publication no. 193; Washington, 1914).
43.
GrinnellJoseph, “The English sparrow has arrived in Death Valley: An experiment in nature”, American naturalist, liii (1919), 468–72.
44.
For example: GrinnellJoseph, “The origin and distribution of the chestnut-backed chickadee”, Auk, xxi (1904), 364–82; RuthvenAlexander G., “Variations and genetic relationships of the gartersnakes”, Bulletin of the United States National Museum, lxi (1908); KinseyAlfred C., “The Gall Wasp Genus Cynips: A study in the origin of species”, Indiana University studies, xvi (1929), 1–507.
45.
MayrErnst, Systematics and the origin of species from the point of view of a zoologist (New York, 1942; new edn, Cambridge, Mass., 1999), 173–85; Mayr, “Speciation phenomena in birds”, American naturalist, lxxiv (1940), 249–78, pp. 266–74.
46.
Mayr, Systematics and the origin (ref. 45), pp. xxii–xxiii, and chaps. 5–7; Mayr, “Speciation phenomena” (ref. 45).
47.
ShelfordVictor E., “Ecological succession, I: Stream fishes and the method of physiographic analysis”, Biological bulletin, xxi (1911), 9–34.
48.
WarmingEugenius, Oecology of plants: An introduction to the study of plant communities (Oxford, 1909; first published in Danish in 1895); ClimentsFrederic E., Plant succession: An analysis of the development of vegetation (Carnegie Institution Publication no. 242; Washington, 1916). See also MacMillanConway, “On the formation of circular muskeag in Tamarack swamps”, Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, xxiii (1896), 500–7.
CowlesHenry C., “Ecological relations of vegetation on the sand dunes of Lake Michigan”, Botanical gazette, xxvii (1899), 36–91, 95–117, 167–202, 281–308, 361–91; OlsonJerry S., “Rates of succession and soil changes on southern Lake Michigan sand dunes”, Botanical gazette, cxix (1958), 125–70, pp. 126–31.
51.
Shelford, “Ecological succession, II” (ref. 18), 128–35; Shelford, “Ecological succession, III: A reconnaissance of its causes in ponds with particular reference to fish”, Biological bulletin, xxi (1911), 1–38.
52.
CowlesHenry C., “The causes of vegetative cycles”, Botanical gazette, li (1911), 161–83, pp. 181–2; AdamsCharles C., “Postglacial origin and migrations”, Journal of geography, i (1902), 303–10, 352–7, pp. 356–7; and MacMillanConway, Metaspermae of the Minnesota Valley (Geological and Natural History Survey of Minnesota Botanical Series 1; Minneapolis, 1892), 584. This visual habit of seeing places in time was probably deeply rooted in the history of the field sciences; see Rudwick, “Encounters with Adam” (ref. 39), and RudwickMartin J. S., Scenes from deep time: Early pictorial representations of the prehistoric world (Chicago, 1992).
53.
AndersonEdgar, Introgressive hybridization (New York, 1949); Anderson, “Hybridization of the habitat”, Evolution, ii (1948), 1–9; and Anderson, “Introgressive hybridization”, Biological reviews, xxviii (1953), 280–307.
54.
VioscaPercyJr, “The irises of southestern Louisiana: A taxonomic and ecological interpretation”, Bulletin of the American Iris Society, April 1935, 3–56.
55.
Anderson, Introgressive hybridization (ref. 53), 1–11; AndersonEdgar, “Man as a maker of new plants and new plant communities”, in ThomasWilliam L. (ed.), Man's role in changing the face of the earth (Chicago, 1956), 763–77. The belts of parallel wagon tracks crisscrossing the arid plains of Colorado — Abandoned as the area was squared and fenced for farming — Could likewise be read as serial “experiments” in grassland succession, see ShantzHomer L., “Plant succession on abandoned roads in eastern Colorado”, Journal of ecology, v (1917), 19–40.
56.
ProvineWilliam B., “Francis B. Sumner and the evolutionary synthesis”, Studies in the history of biology, iii (1979), 211–40.
57.
SumnerFrancis B., “Desert and lava-dwelling mice, and the problem of protective coloration in mammals”, Journal of mammalogy, ii (1921), 75–86, pp. 79–83; Sumner, “The supposed effects of the color tone of the background upon the coat color of mammals”, ibid., v (1924), 81–113.
58.
Sumner, “A proposed collecting trip in Northern Arizona”, to GrinnellJoseph, 13 Dec. 1921; Sumner to Grinnell, 13 Mar., 23 Oct., 12 Nov. 1922; Sumner to SwarthHarry, 24 Dec. 1922, 12 Jan., 31 Jan. 1923; all in PapersJoseph Grinnell, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Berkeley, Cal.
59.
SumnerFrancis B., “An analysis of geographic variation in mice of the Peromyscus polionotus group from Florida and Alabama”, Journal of mammalogy, vii (1926), 149–84, pp. 150–4. See also Sumner to VaughanT. Wayland, 7 May 1925, SumnerFrancis B. Family Papers, box 1, folder 7, Scripps Institution for Oceanography, La Jolla, Cal.; Sumner, “Memorandum to Dr. Vaughan”, 5 Oct. 1925, Frances B. Sumner Papers, box 5, folder 535, Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Sumner to GrinnellJoseph, 23 Oct. 1927, PapersGrinnell; and Sumner, “Report of work accomplished”, n.d. [20 Aug. 1928], Carnegie Institution Archives. Provine, “Francis B. Sumner” (ref. 56).
60.
On narrative modes see BazermanCharles, Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the research article in science (Madison, 1991); and MyersGreg, Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge (Madison, 1990), chap. 5.